Car time ranking

Updated for AC 1.3 in the first post, with the newly wiped RSR rank.

AC 1.3+ CAR RANK (Nov 1, 2015)

Red lines are where there are less than 30 laps set in AC 1.3+, and the old rank times prior to 1.3 are used. This is to give the car an indicative position in the list, but the car's performance in AC 1.3+ could be different, with the newer tyre model.

 

Updated. Keep the laps coming - especially for the cars which are red in the list, as they don't have enough 1.3+ laps yet!

 

A little tweak to bring the under-used cars more in line with the 1.4 model: I've taken a weighted average of the 1.3 times and the pre-1.3 times, only when there's less than 30 1.3 laps. The more 1.3 laps there are, the more weighting the 1.3 times get and the less the pre-1.3 times get.

 

Updated.

 

Hi Wally,
An interesting exercise. Perhaps you should consider introducing a weighting by track so the individual times have some relevance to each other (comparing apples with apples!).
For instance, let's say we were comparing times between Magione 2507 metres, Imola 4909 metres and Monza 5793 metres.

We would rank the longest track, Monza, as 1.0.
Imola is 84% the distance of Monza, so it would be .84
Magione is 43% the distance of Monza, so it would be .43

Obtain the weighted time by dividing the lap time by the weighting
Magione Lap Time 1.08.297 ---- weighted rating = 2.502451
Imola Lap Time 1.41.446 ---- weighted rating = 1.669172
Monza lap Time 1.47.338 ---- weighted rating = 1.47.338

It is still a crude system, but takes into account one of the major variations between tracks, i.e., distance.

The current ranking is prone to major misrepresentation. If the BMW M3 E30 was raced primarily at Magione and the BMW E30 Step 1 was raced primarily at Monza, the ranking would show that the BMW E30 would be superior to the Step 1! (Because the E30 would have more low times.)

 

The different tracks are already scaled to a 100 second benchmark, so the lap time differences between different tracks is irrelevant.

What the ranking actually does, roughly, is rank each car at Monza, say, as well as at Magione (and oif course all the other tracks I mentioned in the OP), and then average the cars rankings.

 

Updated with DLC3 cars and now using times from Brands Hatch GP.

 

Wally, in terms of the tracks which have results counting toward the overall time and ranking; would it be worth considering dropping Nordschleife from this? It is an unusual track in that there are no others like it and has some massive straights - it's not really representative of regular tracks that people race on. I'm thinking it might skew the times?

 

I'd have to look at the figures. Nords is just one of what, 8 or 9 tracks counted. It has more than it's fair share of corners.

But your point about it not being a regular racetrack is a good one.

What's more annoying at the moment is the AC physics changes which keep making the database of lap times useless.

 

OK, I've updated the list using times only from AC 1.4.3 (when the last camber fix came in), and excluding Nords as an atypical track. Note that some cars still have an inadequate number of laps since 1.4.3 to really draw any conclusions (poor old Lotus Elise).

 

Updated.

 

I've been trying to reconcile myself with the Miura and its such bad laptimes. The engine specs are not bad, the car is lightweight, and it was supposed to be the fastest production car when released.

One one hand, the Miura has a bit better laptimes on the list than the Lotus 25. This is quite an accomplishment, that a sports car not much newer than a contemporary F1 is able to beat it.

At the same time, it is slaughtered by the Cobra, another contemporary car. Now I know the Cobra was a regular production vehicle, but it does steal the Miura's thunder.

Perhaps its just that the Miura is such a beatiful vehicle that seeing it almost at the bottom of the list makes me sad...

 

The Miura ... and the Cobra in that respect are both pigs to drive for me. I'm kinda slow though but it seems I'm not the only 1 not satisfied with both these machines.
Actually I was able to do a tad better lap times with more fuel onboard ... ... I don't know. Maybe it was due to trying myself to see if this will be 1 of the cars to drive in the game or not - so latter effort was better but ... it was strange nevertheless.

 

See first post...

I have devised a better sorting and ranking algorithm. This new technique makes better allowances for car/track combos that don't have any times. When comparing two cars, this comparison only looks at tracks where both cars have times recorded. As a result, to show you which cars are close in performance to others, the 3rd column now shows you only the average difference in seconds to the previous car. This still gives you an indication as to how close cars are to each other on average.

Hopefully, we will stop having so many tyre model updates invalidating old data, so we can accumulate enough times to build up a more accurate picture.

 

RSR plans on clearing the slate when 1.6 or Jappack comes out so you might need to do this again

 

Yeah, I'm aware of that. It's a push-button process

 

Figured you were all over it like a fat kid on a cupcake

 

LOL

 

Thanks for May 12th update, could you please sort it so it similar to previously, it´s hard to read the individual numbers as is right now. Maybe just use code or begin with the diff.

Thanks

 

Good idea. I reformatted the list for better readability.